Individual homeowners and developers of residential projects currently desire more choice in the cabinetry market, and better control of the process of selecting, ordering, installing, and/or renovating kitchen cabinets. The vast majority of kitchen cabinet companies manufacture nearly identical products, mostly traditional door styles in a limited selection of finishes, typically with limited interior options and hardware.
Currently, when a homeowner is required to choose a cabinet system, they are limited to the door styles and finishes offered by the selected manufacturer. Once installed in the home, these cabinets cannot be changed without completely remodeling the kitchen, requiring the homeowner to throw out the existing cabinet system, or somehow recycle the system, which is difficult and rarely done. During a conventional remodeling process, the homeowner is typically left without a functioning kitchen for weeks or months.
This lack of flexibility is the direct cause of the generic look of most kitchen cabinets, as owners are hesitant to make a significant investment in something that is considered unusual or different, which they might tire of before they are financially and emotionally ready to remodel. Most kitchens are in place for several years, e.g. often at least ten to fifteen years, before the existing homeowner or new purchaser remodels the kitchen, which represents a significant, long-term investment in a chosen cabinet style.
With the exception of low end, or “off the shelf” products, such as currently sold through warehouse stores, e.g. Ikea, Home Depot, the average delivery time for medium high and high-end, fabricated to order cabinetry is several weeks, e.g. 10 to 12 weeks, for domestic cabinetry, and can extend up to several months, e.g. often 16 to 20 weeks or more, for European cabinetry. Prior to ordering, an additional several weeks to months are required to develop the design layout and generate fabrication drawings. This time frame requires the purchaser to make a commitment to their cabinetry style and supplier far in advance of the actual need for cabinetry.
While there are currently numerous manufacturers and suppliers of cabinets, there are no kitchen cabinet manufacturers that offer a readily changeable product. As well, there are few if any manufacturers and suppliers that provide modular and renovatable cabinets for the upper middle range clients who desire contemporary, European styling in their cabinetry.
It would be advantageous to provide a cabinet system that provides a wide variety of styles, materials, and finishes, which also provides the ability to change and upgrade existing cabinets. The development of such a cabinet system would constitute a major technological advance.
As well, countertops and appliances are purchased from separate suppliers, which requires substantial coordination on the part of the contractor or the homeowner. Countertops are usually measured for and put in to production after the cabinets are in place, which results in a long period when a kitchen installation is at virtually a standstill.
A common complaint in the cabinetry industry is a lack of customer service, particularly after delivery of the cabinetry, and unresponsiveness by the cabinet manufacturer. Kitchen design firms often devote a large portion of their project management time and efforts to post-delivery punch list items, such as getting replacement parts for items damaged on site or missing from delivery, which causes completion delays and frustrates both the retailers' staff and their clients. Even if the design was excellent, the fabrication and installation correct and the product beautiful, a client's final impression of the overall project is often influenced by any problems experienced trying to obtain those final few items required to complete the kitchen.
Developers of high-rise projects or multi-family housing developments are often concerned with the cost and completion of construction projects. The cost and availability of cabinetry systems is therefore critical to the developer market. To a developer, a choice of cabinets often has less to do with aesthetics and style and more to do with selecting a supplier who can deliver accurately and on-time, allowing them to complete units and receive a corresponding Certificate of Occupancy, which typically is required to trigger the release of construction funds, and to allow the developer to sell the unit.
Currently, high-rise projects, such as the Four Seasons in San Francisco, typically offer a limited choice of cabinetry styles for the purchaser of a new unit. The result is that most or all kitchens often have identical cabinetry, with higher priced units, such as on higher floors, having larger layouts and perhaps a better finish. Purchasers willing to “upgrade” and pay the difference are often not permitted to do so, as developers contract with one company for all units in a project. In addition, the administrative difficulties associated with tracking such upgrades are often more trouble for the developer than the potential profit is worth. The result is often that purchasers of condominium units receive a kitchen that is virtually identical to that of their neighbors, even in the high-end, luxury market.
In addition to the need to obtain Certificates of Occupancy in a timely manner, developers of multi-family housing projects often leave the selection of a cabinet manufacturer until quite late in the construction process. As a result, their choice of vendor is limited to those who can supply the cabinetry within the necessary construction schedule. Delays in the delivery of cabinetry can impact the other trades involved in the construction and cost the developers substantial sums in construction financing interest.
While post delivery problems can cause frustration and ill will with the individual retail consumers, customer service is perhaps even more critical to the developer market. If a significant element is missing, arrives damaged or is damaged on-site, replacements must be obtained as quickly as possible to avoid construction schedule delays and the possibility of the developer losing his “time slot” with other trades. Unfortunately, it is an accepted truism in the cabinetry industry that replacement parts can take longer to obtain than the original kitchen.
At the upper end of the multi-family housing market, there is currently a significant problem with purchasers who demolish an existing kitchen, in order to remodel to suit their own taste before moving in. With thousands of high-end multi-family projects recently completed or currently under development, it is clear that a serious problem exists, both in the waste of natural resources, and to the landfill required to dispose of the discarded cabinetry.
It would therefore be ecologically advantageous to provide a modular cabinet system that provides an alternative to the total demolition of kitchen units during a renovation project. The development of such a system would constitute a further technological advance.
Modular cabinetry has previously been described for a variety of applications, such as to provide improvements in the initial assembly of cabinet structures, and/or to provide structures for other applications, such as for appliances and/or furniture.
X. Johnson and G. Hilfinger, Composite Door for Cabinets and the Like, U.S. Pat. No. 3,296,745 (10 Jan. 1967) describe a composite door which “includes a central panel, usually of wood, and an outer metal frame around the entire panel and over the edges thereof.”
G. Hilfinger and X. Johnson, Composite Door, U.S. Pat. No. 3,533,190 (13 Oct. 1970) describe a “composite door having a metal frame and a central door panel is designed particularly for kitchen cabinets. In one form, the central panel includes a front, decorative layer being therebetween and allowed to float to accommodate temperature and humidity changes. The frame can include upper and lower die-cast frame members having integral tongues received in end channels of extruded side frame members. In this manner, doors of various lengths can be made simply by changing the length of the extruded side frame members. Also, the door can be made of four die-cast corner frame members with tongues received in extruded side frame members, a swell as extruded upper and lower frame members. With this arrangement, door of any size can be made by changing the lengths of the extrusions. The door also has other unique features including an arrangement for holding decorative strips.”
M. Schwartz, Doors, Drawer Fronts and Like Structures for Cabinets, Closets and Furniture, U.S. Pat. No. 3,826,551 (30 Jul. 1974) describes a “modular construction for rectangular doors, drawer fronts and like components of cabinets, closets, articles of furniture and the like is disclosed. Any such component includes a peripheral frame composed of four interlocked, preferably mitered, end butted side members, and a central panel or insert overlying the central opening of the frame and removably retained in place at the rear of the frame. The side members of the frame are injection molded of polystyrene or other suitable synthetic plastic material to basically identical constructions, each member being provided at one end thereof with an integral male connecting portion and at its other end with a matching recessed or female connecting portion to enable the four side members of the frame to be snapped together firmly at perfect right angles to each other. After assembly, the side members of the frame may be permanently cemented or bonded to one another at their junctures, and detachable back members may be screwed or otherwise secured to the back of the frame to assist in retaining the insert in place. All the structural units, i.e., the side and back members and the inserts, can be produced in a broad range of sizes. The invention thus makes it possible for a dealer to stock a relatively small selection of side members, inserts and back members of various sizes while yet being able to form therefrom a far larger number of combinations.”
O. Heeg, Method of Making a Furniture Front Element, U.S. Pat. No. 4,707,204 (17 Nov. 1987) describes “a furniture front element like a cabinet door, of which the frame leg members are joined in mitre cut and without any screwed connection. The lengths of the leg members are infinitely adjustable and the frame filling pieces are designed as a storage means in order to be able to change the front surface of the element to the desired extent”
O. Heeg, Furniture Front Element; U.S. Pat. No. 4,783,945 (15 Nov. 1988) describes “A furniture front element like a cabinet door, of which the frame leg members are joined in mitre cut and without any screwed connection. The lengths of the leg members are infinitely adjustable and the frame filling pieces are designed as a storage means in order to be able to change the front surface of the element to the desired extent.”
F. Delafield, Technique for Mounting Panels for Furniture; U.S. Pat. No. 4,987,713 (29 Jan. 1991), describes a “frame and strip assembly for mounting an edge portion of a panel. The assembly includes a frame member having a channel-like recess for receiving the edge portion of the panel and a mounting strip adapted to be received in the recess. The strip includes a base and a pair of opposed side walls defining a generally U-shaped cross section. The upper portion of each of the side walls of the mounting strip defines a transversely extending wing-like flange. The flanges and the side walls of the mounting strip are in a substantially continuous and coextensive engagement with the frame member adjacent to the recess and the panel to suspend the edge portion of the panel in the frame member and to firmly secure the edge portion of the panel in the mounting strip, thereby both preventing contact between the panel edge and the frame member and movement between the panel edge and the mounting strip.”
D. Kobos, G. Lindgren, and J. Ferencevich, Dishwasher Front Panel Retainer Channel; U.S. Pat. No. 5,571,276 (5 Nov. 1996) describe “A channel member is provided which is configured to be held on the frame of an appliance. The frame includes a lip perpendicular to a first portion of the frame with a flange extending perpendicular to the lip parallel to and in the direction of the first portion of the frame. At least one tab projects out of the first portion of the frame. The channel member is configured to receive a retaining strip having a projecting portion. The channel member has a channel portion and a back portion. The back portion extends between the lip and the tab and has a portion retainingly held by the tab. The channel portion comprises a first resilient leg and a second resilient leg. The first and second legs are spaced apart to form a channel for receiving the projecting portion of the retaining strip. At least one of the first and second legs has a detent formed thereon to retainingly engage the projection. The second leg is configured to at least partially be received in an area defined by the first portion of the frame, the lip and the flange and yet to avoid engaging interference with the flange.”
As well, some appliances available through Sub-Zero Corporation, of Madison Wis., feature appliance door assemblies which comprise a variety of door fronts, such as 600 Series framed door panels and overlay door panels.
Other documents provide technological background regarding cabinet structures and processes, such as: Modular Shelving with Cabinet, European Patent Application No. EP 1 223 351 A2; Integrated Laundry Center, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2002/0017117 A1; Modular Shelving with Cabinet, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2002/0171332 A1; T. Lamb, Window with Removable Fixed Window Sash, U.S. Pat. No. 4,991,369 (12 Feb. 1991); C. James, Front Panel Assembly for Barbecue Grill Carts, U.S. Pat. No. 5,220,764 (22 Jun. 1993); R. Clark, Device for Renovating Old Cabinets, U.S. Pat. No. 3,403,953 (01 Oct. 1968); I. Storvick, Corner-Joint for Knockdown Show-Cases and Other Structures, U.S. Pat. No. 1,282,719 (22 Oct. 1918); E. Hassing, Furniture Structure; U.S. Pat. No. 3,877,765 (15 Apr. 1975); R. McGrath and R. Jutte, Modular Insulation Panels and Insulated Structures, U.S. Pat. No. 5,875,599 (2 March 1999); D. Wunderlich, Modular Furniture Construction System, U.S. Pat. No. 6,152,553 (28 Nov. 2000); R. Hahn, Electronic Equipment Modular Cabinet System, U.S. Pat. No. 5,165,770 (24 Nov. 1992); F. Adickes, Modular Cabinet System, U.S. Pat. No. 3,857,619 (31 Dec. 1974); C. Williams, A. Villa, and D. Humphrey, Modular Cabinet Assembly, U.S. Pat. No. 3,892,452 (01 Jul. 1975); R. Schenck, Modular Furniture System, U.S. Pat. No. 4,337,988 (6 Jul. 1982); H. Yoshiyuki, Modular Cabinet System, U.S. Pat. No. 4,400,044 (23 Aug. 1983); D. Handley and P. Costigan, Modular Bar System, U.S. Pat. No. 5,184,886 (09 Feb. 1993); S. Pagelow, J. Whalen, D. Bullis Jr., and D. Seals, Modular Cabinet System, U.S. Pat. No. 5,704,699 (6 Jan. 1998); G. Nikolai, Cabinet Construction System, U.S. Pat. No. 5,718,493 (17 Feb. 1998); J. Smith, Modular Interlocking Cabinets; U.S. Pat. No. 5,951,127 (14 Sep. 1999); H. Krause and H. Welke, Cabinet System, U.S. Pat. No. 6,267,462 B1 (31 Jul. 2001); W. Gourdeau and R. Hahn, Door Construction, U.S. Pat. No. 3,936,107 (3 Feb. 1976); L. Marks and R. Spiegel, Appliance Front Panel Retainer; U.S. Pat. No. 5,603,557 (18 Feb. 1997); Modular Cabinet System for Office; Spain Patent No. ES 2066677; Modular Kitchens, Home & Garden TV, as seen at www.hgtv.com/hgtv/shows_kde/episode/0,1806, HGTV—3860—6561,00.html, 2003; Why Reface Your Cabinets, Kitchen Fronts of GA, as seen at http://www.kitchenfrontsofga.com/yreface.htm, 2003; Real Wood Cabinet Refacing by Homecraft, Homecraft Kitchen Cabinet & Refacing, as seen at http://www.homecraftcabinets.com/Refacing_your_Kitchen_cabinets.html; and Step by Step Instructions to Refacing, as seen at http://www.kitchenrefacing.org/reface1.html.
While cabinet systems have previously been described, most prior modular cabinet structures are associated with modularity for the sake of ease of initial fabrication, and fail to address later service, renovation or reuse of cabinet structures.
It would therefore be advantageous to provide a modular cabinet structure and method, and an associated system, which readily allow service, renovation or reuse of cabinet structures, such as to efficiently renovate a kitchen with new face panels, while retaining cabinet caracasses and the structural frames of the cabinetry. The development of such a cabinet system would constitute a major technological advance.
In addition, the cabinetry industry has not adopted currently available technologies, resulting in unnecessary mistakes in ordering and fabrication and delays in obtaining and tracking the delivery of necessary parts.
It would therefore be advantageous to provide a cabinet business management system and associated processes, such as associated with a modular cabinet system, to provide integrated information, sales, ordering, tracking, and/or service. The development of such a system would constitute a further technological advance.